• pycorax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      2 months ago

      Reddit and lemmy like to say that but I doubt any noticeable portion of the player base is going to bother. Has been for almost every game with denuvo lol

      • Taalen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 months ago

        Sadly your average person just doesn’t care about consumer rights, in any matter.

        I learned my lesson about malicious DRM when Starforce broke my new computer’s DVD drive back in the day. Fortunately it was still under warranty so I had it fixed, but sucked all the same.

        • Random Dent@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I don’t like denuvo but for me it’s the price that’s the deal-breaker. Nearly $170CAD for the full version is absolutely bonkers, and I simply can’t justify it. So I guess I’m picking it up in a Steam sale in 2028 or something when it’s $40 with all the DLC.

          • teuto@lemmy.teuto.icu
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            22
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yes, cracked Denuvo games actually run better because you aren’t running a virus anti piracy software in the background. It runs at the kernel level and Crowdstrike is a pretty good case study on why that’s bad.

            • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              2 months ago

              Alright. I guess I understand why the best option is to NOT buy this game. But not only that, we need to all make our voices heard that Civilization is a game we WANT to play, but will not buy until Denuvo is removed.

              Vote with your wallets, and let them know this choice cost them millions of sales.

              Otherwise the NEXT game will have this too. Because we tolerated it.

        • Katana314@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          The “slows down your game” bit has always been hotly contested. There are certainly occasions where a modified exe without Denuvo runs faster, combined with accusations that that specific game integrated Denuvo in a very poor last-minute implementation that calls it dozens of times a second.

          I don’t work on video games, but my own experience with software engineering and release management suggests those sorts of murky answers are likely to be the norm.

          • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            There’s nothing contested about it. Add a bunch of extra operations to the game loop and you can slow down a game. You only have so much headroom in each frame. Dunova takes up a lot of that time. And let’s not forget you can literally so tests with games that had denovu and then removed it. The testing shows pretty clearly that it does indeed slow down games.

            • Katana314@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              …Great, so you’re going to start giving just as much criticism to devs for writing debug logs every so often?

              There’s an order of magnitude between a difficult task slowing operations, and pure inefficiency / bad coding doing it. Can you describe something that actually proves you know the slightest thing about how programming works?